Eastern District of California • 1:25-cv-01920

#1

Dec 18, 2025

PETITION for WRIT of HABEAS CORPUS against All Defendants by Juan Ricardo Orozco Gutierrez. (Filing fee $ 5, receipt number ACAEDC-12685070) (Attachments: # 1 Civil Cover Sheet Civil Case Cover Sheet, # 2 Exhibit Warrant for Arrest, # 3 Order denying Bond for Petitioner's spouse)(Dougherty, Neal) (Entered: 12/18/2025)

#2

Dec 18, 2025

PRISONER NEW CASE DOCUMENTS and ORDER RE CONSENT ISSUED. Consent or Decline due by 1/23/2026. (Attachments: # 1 Consent Form) (Deputy Clerk CRM) (Entered: 12/18/2025)

Dec 19, 2025

Minute Order

#4

Dec 23, 2025

Amended Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus

#5

Dec 23, 2025

Temporary Restraining Order

#6

Dec 30, 2025

MINUTE ORDER signed by District Judge Dale A. Drozd on 12/30/2025: Pending the issuance of the courts order resolving the pending 5 motion for temporary restraining order, and unless and until the court orders otherwise, the court ORDERS that respondents shall not take any action to remove petitioner from the United States or to move petitioner out of the Eastern District of California. See F.T.C. v. Dean Foods Co., 384 U.S. 597, 604 (1966) (acknowledging the courts express authority under the All Writs Act to issue such temporary injunctions as may be necessary to protect its own jurisdiction). Given the exigent circumstances present, the court finds that this order is warranted to maintain the status quo pending its forthcoming order resolving petitioner's pending 5 motion for temporary restraining order. Further, no later than today, 12/30/2025, by 5:00 PM, petitioner's counsel is DIRECTED (1) to serve respondents with a copy of the petition, motion for temporary restraining order, and accompanying papers, along with this order, to the United States Attorneys Office for the Eastern District of California by email at usacae.ecf2241-imm@usdoj.gov; and (2) to promptly file proof of such service on the docket. Respondents shall file a written opposition to the pending 5 motion for temporary restraining order by 5:00 PM on Friday, 1/2/2026. In that opposition, respondents shall substantively address whether any provision of law or fact in this case would distinguish it from this courts decision in Franco v. Meyer, 1:25-cv-01620-DAD-CKD, 2025 WL 3280782 (E.D. Cal. Nov. 25, 2025) and similar cases previously decided by this court, or otherwise indicate that the matter is not substantively distinguishable. If the parties were to jointly agree upon a less demanding briefing schedule, the court will consider the parties proposal.(Text Only Entry) (Deputy Clerk JRW) (Entered: 12/30/2025)

#7

Dec 30, 2025

Notice of Related Case

#8

Dec 30, 2025

Certificate / Proof of Service

#9

Dec 30, 2025

AMENDED DOCUMENT by Juan Ricardo Orozco Gutierrez: Amended 7 Notice of Related Case(s). (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A)(Dougherty, Neal) (Entered: 12/30/2025)

Dec 30, 2025

Minute Order

#10

Jan 02, 2026

RESPONSE by Sergio Albarran, Pamela Jo Bondi, Christopher Chestnut, Kristi Noem to 5 Motion for Temporary Restraining Order, 4 Amended Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus. Attorney Campbell, Charles added. (Campbell, Charles) (Entered: 01/02/2026)

#11

Jan 05, 2026

MINUTE ORDER signed by District Judge Dale A. Drozd on 1/5/2025: On 12/23/2025, petitioner filed a motion for temporary restraining order (Doc. No. 5 ). On 1/2/2026, respondents filed their response (Doc. No. 10 ) to the motion. Having considered the circumstances of petitioners detention and the parties arguments, the court finds analogous and persuasive the undersigneds previously issued order in Franco v. Meyer, No. 1:25-cv-01620-DAD-CKD (HC), 2025 WL 3280782, *23 (E.D. Cal. Nov. 25, 2025) (citing cases), where the undersigned concluded that the respondents had improperly and unlawfully arrested the petitioner by detaining him during an adjustment of status interview. Accordingly, pursuant to the reasoning of the undersigned set forth in Franco, petitioners motion for a temporary restraining order (Doc. No. 5 ) is GRANTED and the court ORDERS the following: (1) Respondents are ORDERED to immediately release petitioner from respondents custody on the same conditions that governed his release immediately prior to his detention on December 2, 2025; and (2) Respondents are ENJOINED AND RESTRAINED from using the adjustment of status process to re-detain petitioner, including at or near any future interview related to petitioners application for adjustment of status. Under the circumstances of this case, petitioner will not be required to post bond pursuant to Rule 65(c) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The parties are directed to meet and confer and, if possible, submit a joint proposed briefing schedule and hearing date with respect to any motion for a preliminary injunction no later than fourteen (14) days from the date of entry of this order. (Text Only Entry) (Deputy Clerk JRW) (Entered: 01/05/2026)

Jan 05, 2026

Minute Order AND Order on Motion for TRO